AMD in Trouble? RX 480 Powergate

razor1 said:
Yeah and we also don't know if there are any OEM cards out there yet lol.

But for the r6990 the cost of such a system an OEM can get away with a few failures because its going to be only at a card or power supply level.

At the cost of system that will house a rx 480 and the volume sales of such a system, they is a big risk for them.
Click to expand...
Agreed....its probably set up as self insured possibly? If the system fails over a certain percentage then they would look into AMD paying for it one way or another. If there were mass failures then it would be very costly for both partys.
 
razor1 said:
Yeah but that card wsn't a OEM seller lol. So at the end it didn't matter for it.

Actually I don't think it drew much from the PCI-e its power draw was all from its connectors.

Anyone spending that kind of money for such a card probably are getting top end components anyways.
Click to expand...
Lmao it only matters if it's for OEM now...
Didn't GTX 960 also surge?
 
Sheppard said:
Lmao it only matters if it's for OEM now...
Didn't GTX 960 also surge?
Click to expand...

Did OEM GTX 960's surge? I haven't heard about it using more then 75 watts off the PCI-e or max out its connectors.

It matters more to OEM's yes, if they will pick it up and honor their own warranty, because retail sales aren't going to know what graphics card you have in your system if your motherboard fails and you call in for an RMA. Now if they ask you what graphics card is in your system, and they know its not PCI-e complaint they can easily say, sorry we don't cover that under our warranty. Then the consumer is screwed out of their warranty.
 
Sheppard said:
Lmao it only matters if it's for OEM now...
Didn't GTX 960 also surge?
Click to expand...


Even the 980 ti surges past 75w but its very small however it hovers around 72w (which is pretty close in itself) and who knows what when clocked to 1500. But it doesn't matter at all since there's no correlation between it running high or surging and deaths of motherboards. In that regard, I'd guess that in the coming days after consumers get receive their cards, we either get reports of motherboard failures equipped with rx 480s or we don't. Imo, AMD only has days to sort this out before confidence is seriously tarnished. They have to realize that there's a huge sect that always wants them to fail, so not seeing this coming is quite an oversight.
 
ppi said:
Actually, OEMs will first test, whether thier systems are stable and working as intended. And since OEMs typically use so-so components to cut down price, I am sure it would be the Dells, HPs and Lenovos out there, who would raise first red flag on RX480 not meeting specification. At stock.

OC'ing is another matter, but then OC is tuning out-of-spec by definition. This may be one of the reasons of very poor overclockability we see now.

AMD should fix this, though, no debate.
Click to expand...

point taken, though I disagree with the poor overclockability part. I'm running on a 5960x now with a 60% oc running sub 50 at load 24/7. All my last few 6 intel chips were able to do 40%
 
thesmokingman said:
Even the 980 ti surges past 75w but its very small however it hovers around 72w (which is pretty close in itself) and who knows what when clocked to 1500. But it doesn't matter at all since there's no correlation between it running high or surging and deaths of motherboards. In that regard, I'd guess that in the coming days after consumers get receive their cards, we either get reports of motherboard failures equipped with rx 480s or we don't. Imo, AMD only has days to sort this out before confidence is seriously tarnished. They have to realize that there's a huge sect that always wants them to fail, so not seeing this coming is quite an oversight.
Click to expand...

And this is an easy fix to get ahead of what might come down the road.
 
thesmokingman said:
Even the 980 ti surges past 75w but its very small however it hovers around 72w (which is pretty close in itself) and who knows what when clocked to 1500. But it doesn't matter at all since there's no correlation between it running high or surging and deaths of motherboards. In that regard, I'd guess that in the coming days after consumers get receive their cards, we either get reports of motherboard failures equipped with rx 480s or we don't. Imo, AMD only has days to sort this out before confidence is seriously tarnished. They have to realize that there's a huge sect that always wants them to fail, so not seeing this coming is quite an oversight.
Click to expand...
Evidence for 980ti hovering at 72w from pci-e slot? Oh wait, "the huge sect that always wants them to fail" part is giving it away.
 
lolfail9001 said:
Evidence for 980ti hovering at 72w from pci-e slot? Oh wait, "the huge sect that always wants them to fail" part is giving it away.
Click to expand...


Toms. AMD have many critics, not just fans but even on the Street. Everyday motleyfool and esp seekingalpha write a new article detailing how AMD is headed for disaster, every single day lmao. AMD should be well aware that anything they do there will be a negative angle on it so they best be prepared for that. It's like always being the away team.
 
lolfail9001 said:
Evidence for 980ti hovering at 72w from pci-e slot? Oh wait, "the huge sect that always wants them to fail" part is giving it away.
Click to expand...
I 100% agree with him on the sect of people wanting to see them fail thing. It is absolutely real.
 
so realistically, set aside this pcie spec thing.

would my mobo really die from the ~5% extra power draw from pcie? I managed to snag a gtx 1070 on the same day the rx480s released, so i decided to get the gtx. but I still have a pc with a r9 390 i want to replace, for power savings.
 
ufokillerz said:
so realistically, set aside this pcie spec thing.

would my mobo really die from the ~5% extra power draw from pcie? I managed to snag a gtx 1070 on the same day the rx480s released, so i decided to get the gtx. but I still have a pc with a r9 390 i want to replace, for power savings.
Click to expand...
Depends on the quality of components used. Most likely not, but on a cheap system it could cause issues over time.
 
linuxdude9 said:
Not an issue at all... guess no one read the PCI Express specifications RX 480 powergate problem has a solution • /r/Amd
Click to expand...


But but the mob has just begun...!


Cliff notes: The motherboard controls power draw thru the lanes as it makes some calculation and some boards can stand to allow more draw due to better design. AMD can change their bios so those boards calculate less draw. <--- that's what I read.
 
razor1 said:
Did OEM GTX 960's surge? I haven't heard about it using more then 75 watts off the PCI-e or max out its connectors.

It matters more to OEM's yes, if they will pick it up and honor their own warranty, because retail sales aren't going to know what graphics card you have in your system if your motherboard fails and you call in for an RMA. Now if they ask you what graphics card is in your system, and they know its not PCI-e complaint they can easily say, sorry we don't cover that under our warranty. Then the consumer is screwed out of their warranty.
Click to expand...

Just saw this over at OCN, any comments razor? The context is this is a reference 750 Ti without any additional power connectors, so ALL power is pulled from PCIe slot, and as you can clearly see, it surges over 100W very frequently.

01-GTX-750-Ti-Complete-Gaming-Loop-170-seconds.png
 
n=1 said:
Just saw this over at OCN, any comments razor? The context is this is a reference 750 Ti without any additional power connectors, so ALL power is pulled from PCIe slot, and as you can clearly see, it surges over 100W very frequently.

01-GTX-750-Ti-Complete-Gaming-Loop-170-seconds.png
Click to expand...


Surprised, no power gate theatrics?
 
n=1 said:
Just saw this over at OCN, any comments razor? The context is this is a reference 750 Ti without any additional power connectors, so ALL power is pulled from PCIe slot, and as you can clearly see, it surges over 100W very frequently.

01-GTX-750-Ti-Complete-Gaming-Loop-170-seconds.png
Click to expand...

Dear lord now you went and done it. Prepare to be thread spammed. :unsure:
 
n=1 said:
Just saw this over at OCN, any comments razor? The context is this is a reference 750 Ti without any additional power connectors, so ALL power is pulled from PCIe slot, and as you can clearly see, it surges over 100W very frequently.

01-GTX-750-Ti-Complete-Gaming-Loop-170-seconds.png
Click to expand...
having peaks is ok, if its sustained its bad

Its like red lining your car engine, you can do it, just don't do it for more then a certain time because it will blow.
 
thesmokingman said:
Even the 980 ti surges past 75w but its very small however it hovers around 72w (which is pretty close in itself) and who knows what when clocked to 1500. But it doesn't matter at all since there's no correlation between it running high or surging and deaths of motherboards. In that regard, I'd guess that in the coming days after consumers get receive their cards, we either get reports of motherboard failures equipped with rx 480s or we don't. Imo, AMD only has days to sort this out before confidence is seriously tarnished. They have to realize that there's a huge sect that always wants them to fail, so not seeing this coming is quite an oversight.
Click to expand...

980 ti hovers around 72w?
Nvidia GeForce GTX 980 Ti 6GB Power Consumption
... not exactly no.

Now compare with this : AMD Radeon RX 480 8GB Power Consumption Results
uh oh.
 
Bowman15 said:
Dear lord now you went and done it. Prepare to be thread spammed. :unsure:
Click to expand...

People are free to exercise their 1st amendment rights, but it's a genuine question.

razor1 said:
having peaks is ok, if its sustained its bad

Its like red lining your car engine, you can do it, just don't do it for more then a certain time because it will blow.
Click to expand...

How do we distinguish between sustained and peak? Not trying to be pedantic here lol

What I mean is from the graph it looks like it's surging over 75W most of the time.
 
Right.

Everyone shut up for a minute.

The motherboard it self sets the maximum allowed watt per slot in the "Slot Capabilities Register" which you can configure up to over 300 watt per slot. In the bits 7 to 14 "Slot Power Limit Value" you can set 250, 275, 300 and above 300 watt. This will be multiplied with bits 15 to 16 "Slot Power Limit Scale" in steps x1 ,x0.1, x0.01 and x0.001. So its up to the motherboard manufacturer and the power management on it how many watt the slot is capable of.
Click to expand...

I read this yesterday.

The 300W they are talking about is 75W (motherboard) + 75(6pin) +150W (8pin)

I have found a document detailing the electromechnical specifications of PCI-E. WIll post shortly
 
n=1 said:
People are free to exercise their 1st amendment rights, but it's a genuine question.



How do we distinguish between sustained and peak? Not trying to be pedantic here lol

What I mean is from the graph it looks like it's surging over 75W most of the time.
Click to expand...


If you take lets say a capacitor that is rated for a certain uF, and you keep going over it and stay over it what will happen? You will blow it.

But if you peak and go back under its rating it will be fine. Capacitors have tolerance ratings because of this.
 
n=1 said:
What I mean is from the graph it looks like it's surging over 75W most of the time.
Click to expand...

The graph also shows it below 75W for a greater amount of time. The line drawn for "average" is around 64W.

The "average" line for RX480 measurements has been above 75W.
 
182IP4K.png



So... You guys were saying... ? :p
 
Last edited:
razor1 said:
If you take lets say a capacitor that is rated for a certain uF, and you keep going over it and stay over it what will happen? You will blow it.

But if you peak and go back under its rating it will be fine. Capacitors have tolerance ratings because of this.
Click to expand...
How do you go above the uF? Or do mean voltage?
 
The PCI Express® Base Specification Revision 3.0 is the wrong spec.

The power usage etc. is defined in the PCI Express Card Electromechanical Specification. Please look at page 27 and 36 of the PCI Express® Base Specification Revision 3.0

From Page 27 "Document Organization"

The PCI Express Base Specification contains the technical details of the architecture, protocol, Link Layer, Physical Layer, and software interface. The PCI Express Base Specification is applicable to all variants of PCI Express.

The PCI Express Card Electromechanical Specification focuses on information necessary to implementing an evolutionary strategy with the PCI desktop/server mechanicals as well as electricals. The mechanical chapters of the specification contain a definition of evolutionary PCI Express card edge connectors while the electrical chapters cover auxiliary signals, power delivery, and the adapter interconnect electrical budget.

Page 36 states the Reference Documents and the PCI Express Card Electromechanical Specification

And from the PCI Express™ Card Electromechanical Specification Rev. 1.1 (2.0 is behind a paywall, but wikipedia has the same information):

A standard height x16 add-in card intended for server I/O applications must limit its power dissipation to 25 W. A standard height x16 add-in card intended for graphics applications must, at initial power-up, not exceed 25 W of power dissipation, until configured as a high power device, at which time it must not exceed 75 W of power dissipation. Refer to Chapter 6 of the PCI Express Base Specification, Revision 1.1 for information on the power configuration mechanism.
Click to expand...


THE PCI-E SPEC I LINKED IN THE PREVIOUS POST SPECIFIES

12V @ 5.5A WITH MAX 8% TOLERANCE

3.3 @ 3.0A WITH MAX 9% TOLERANCE

12V MAX = 71.3W

3.3V MAX = 10.8W

According to Tom's Hardware:

RX480 GAMING (metro 4k) AVERAGE is

82W on 12V,

4W on 3.3V

for a total of 86W

http://media.bestofmicro.com/A/N/591359/original/18-Gaming-Bars.png

82W is precisely 14% over spec on the 12V, and in total 86W is 5% over spec, and this is assuming MAXIMUM voltage tolerance of 8 and 9 percent respectively.
 
A quick FYI: over at the r/AMD reddit, the AMD fanbois seem overjoyed to learn that the PCI-SIG is not likely to sue AMD for trademark infringement, or to petition the US International Trade Commission (ITC) and/or US Customs and Border Partol (CBP) to block all imports of the products that are using the PCE-Express trademark in violation of the lincensing agreement.

The PCI-SIG may not have to. My preliminary research indicates that licensees of a trademark, even non-exclusive licensees, have standing both to sue for trademark infringement and to request the ITC/CBP block the import of infringing (counterfeit) goods. See the answer to question 5 in this link. If that's true, NVidia can request that the US government block the import of all AMD products that violate the terms of the PCI Express licensing agreement.

Someone might want to let the smug little fanbois over at r/AMD know that. ;)

Disclaimer: I'm not a trademark attorney, so this could be incorrect. I am not providing legal advice to a client. No attorney-client relationship is created by this communication.
 
pcgeekesq said:
A quick FYI: over at the r/AMD reddit, the AMD fanbois seem overjoyed to learn that the PCI-SIG is not likely to sue AMD for trademark infringement, or to petition the US International Trade Commission (ITC) and/or US Customs and Border Partol (CBP) to block all imports of the products that are using the PCE-Express trademark in violation of the lincensing agreement.

The PCI-SIG may not have to. My preliminary research indicates that licensees of a trademark, even non-exclusive licensees, have standing both to sue for trademark infringement and to request the ITC/CBP block the import of infringing (counterfeit) goods. See the answer to question 5 in this link. If that's true, NVidia can request that the US government block the import of all AMD products that violate the terms of the PCI Express licensing agreement.

Someone might want to let the smug little fanbois over at r/AMD know that. ;)

Disclaimer: I'm not a trademark attorney, so this could be incorrect. I am not providing legal advice to a client. No attorney-client relationship is created by this communication.
Click to expand...

Lol. Listen. If I post this, I'm gonna get threatened with lawsuits :p not you :p

already like 5 threats

Best one so far was a guy called 'V3ggies' warning me that the r/AMD will sue me

xD
 
thesmokingman said:
Toms. AMD have many critics, not just fans but even on the Street. Everyday motleyfool and esp seekingalpha write a new article detailing how AMD is headed for disaster, every single day lmao. AMD should be well aware that anything they do there will be a negative angle on it so they best be prepared for that. It's like always being the away team.
Click to expand...
I did actually check Toms review few hours before your post. It posted ~50-60w average from the slot with peaks slightly over 70w. Notice that peaks are not worth a damn, since they last half a microsecond at most.

Now, these investor sites are not worth a damn indeed, but they are collective blogs rather than actual sect.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top